GI Bill
 

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 00:44:51 +0000, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:


I agree with that. I mean, I don't begrudge the current veterans their
due - good for them.

Speaking of veterans, I heard something disturbing on the radio this
morning. It seems increasing numbers of current soldiers are losing in
child custody hearings. Some courts are deciding recurring tours out of
country don't provide a stable home environment. I can see putting a
child's welfare first, but, geez, what an added cost to those putting
their ass on the line.

GI Bill
 

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 12:52:34 -0000, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 00:44:51 +0000, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:


I agree with that. I mean, I don't begrudge the current veterans their
due - good for them.

Speaking of veterans, I heard something disturbing on the radio this
morning. It seems increasing numbers of current soldiers are losing in
child custody hearings. Some courts are deciding recurring tours out of
country don't provide a stable home environment. I can see putting a
child's welfare first, but, geez, what an added cost to those putting
their ass on the line.

Nothing new there. That's been going on since soldiers have been sent
overseas.
--
John H

GI Bill
 

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 08:57:22 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 08:20:13 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 12:52:34 -0000, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 00:44:51 +0000, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:


I agree with that. I mean, I don't begrudge the current veterans their
due - good for them.

Speaking of veterans, I heard something disturbing on the radio this
morning. It seems increasing numbers of current soldiers are losing in
child custody hearings. Some courts are deciding recurring tours out of
country don't provide a stable home environment. I can see putting a
child's welfare first, but, geez, what an added cost to those putting
their ass on the line.

Nothing new there. That's been going on since soldiers have been sent
overseas.

So much for your "Family Values".


Family values have nothing to do with it. I've been there and done that.
Continuously looking for a fight does you no good.
--
John H

GI Bill
 

On Feb 14, 8:57*am, wrote:
On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 08:20:13 -0500, John H.





wrote:
On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 12:52:34 -0000, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 00:44:51 +0000, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:

I agree with that. *I mean, I don't begrudge the current veterans their
due - good for them.

Speaking of veterans, I heard something disturbing on the radio this
morning. *It seems increasing numbers of current soldiers are losing in
child custody hearings. *Some courts are deciding recurring tours out of
country don't provide a stable home environment. *I can see putting a
child's welfare first, but, geez, what an added cost to those putting
their ass on the line.

Nothing new there. That's been going on since soldiers have been sent
overseas.

So much for your "Family Values".- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Your party who has been more or less in power for the last half
century.. Maybe if they would stop some of these rediculous
investigations, they could address the problem in congress... ....
where it would have to be addressed,

GI Bill
 

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 09:37:28 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 09:30:31 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 08:57:22 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 08:20:13 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 12:52:34 -0000, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 00:44:51 +0000, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:


I agree with that. I mean, I don't begrudge the current veterans their
due - good for them.

Speaking of veterans, I heard something disturbing on the radio this
morning. It seems increasing numbers of current soldiers are losing in
child custody hearings. Some courts are deciding recurring tours out of
country don't provide a stable home environment. I can see putting a
child's welfare first, but, geez, what an added cost to those putting
their ass on the line.

Nothing new there. That's been going on since soldiers have been sent
overseas.

So much for your "Family Values".


Family values have nothing to do with it. I've been there and done that.
Continuously looking for a fight does you no good.


Family values is ALL the above has to do with. Continuously exposing
yourself as an amoral self absorbed pig does you no good.


"...amoral self absorbed pig..."

Wow, is that because I'm not into baby killing or because I couldn't take
my kids to Korea?


--
John H

GI Bill
 

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 09:45:35 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 06:39:14 -0800 (PST),
wrote:

On Feb 14, 8:57*am, wrote:
On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 08:20:13 -0500, John H.





wrote:
On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 12:52:34 -0000, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 00:44:51 +0000, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:

I agree with that. *I mean, I don't begrudge the current veterans their
due - good for them.

Speaking of veterans, I heard something disturbing on the radio this
morning. *It seems increasing numbers of current soldiers are losing in
child custody hearings. *Some courts are deciding recurring tours out of
country don't provide a stable home environment. *I can see putting a
child's welfare first, but, geez, what an added cost to those putting
their ass on the line.

Nothing new there. That's been going on since soldiers have been sent
overseas.

So much for your "Family Values".- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Your party who has been more or less in power for the last half
century.. Maybe if they would stop some of these rediculous
investigations, they could address the problem in congress... ....
where it would have to be addressed,

"My party"? And what dose Ken Starr have to dio with this?


Salty, slow down. You're losing it.
--
John H

GI Bill
 

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 10:05:10 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 09:54:04 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 09:37:28 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 09:30:31 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 08:57:22 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 08:20:13 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 12:52:34 -0000, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 00:44:51 +0000, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:


I agree with that. I mean, I don't begrudge the current veterans their
due - good for them.

Speaking of veterans, I heard something disturbing on the radio this
morning. It seems increasing numbers of current soldiers are losing in
child custody hearings. Some courts are deciding recurring tours out of
country don't provide a stable home environment. I can see putting a
child's welfare first, but, geez, what an added cost to those putting
their ass on the line.

Nothing new there. That's been going on since soldiers have been sent
overseas.

So much for your "Family Values".


Family values have nothing to do with it. I've been there and done that.
Continuously looking for a fight does you no good.


Family values is ALL the above has to do with. Continuously exposing
yourself as an amoral self absorbed pig does you no good.


"...amoral self absorbed pig..."

Wow, is that because I'm not into baby killing or because I couldn't take
my kids to Korea?


It's who you are on every level, apparently.


Why is it that a discussion with you folks ends with you making personal
attacks, name-calling, derogatory implications, etc.

I've never understood that. Doug, Harry, you - all the same.
--
John H

GI Bill
 

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 11:35:48 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 10:36:15 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 10:05:10 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 09:54:04 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 09:37:28 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 09:30:31 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 08:57:22 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 08:20:13 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 12:52:34 -0000, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 00:44:51 +0000, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:


I agree with that. I mean, I don't begrudge the current veterans their
due - good for them.

Speaking of veterans, I heard something disturbing on the radio this
morning. It seems increasing numbers of current soldiers are losing in
child custody hearings. Some courts are deciding recurring tours out of
country don't provide a stable home environment. I can see putting a
child's welfare first, but, geez, what an added cost to those putting
their ass on the line.

Nothing new there. That's been going on since soldiers have been sent
overseas.

So much for your "Family Values".


Family values have nothing to do with it. I've been there and done that.
Continuously looking for a fight does you no good.


Family values is ALL the above has to do with. Continuously exposing
yourself as an amoral self absorbed pig does you no good.


"...amoral self absorbed pig..."

Wow, is that because I'm not into baby killing or because I couldn't take
my kids to Korea?


It's who you are on every level, apparently.


Why is it that a discussion with you folks ends with you making personal
attacks, name-calling, derogatory implications, etc.

I've never understood that. Doug, Harry, you - all the same.

There is no such thing as "you folks".

Why do YOU folks

Say what??

insist on equating abortion to murder, yet have no
problem supporting the death penalty. Don't try to weasel out of that
with some argument about people who get executed are different. In
fact, many of them are later found to be innocent, and you yourself
cited the Christian ultimatum, "Thou shalt Not Kill". Is that one of
the ten commandments, or the ten suggestions to be used when
convenient?


I'm astonished that you know my religious inclinations and my feelings on
the death penalty.

Again, why is it that a discussion with you folks ends with you making
personal attacks, name-calling, derogatory implications, etc?
--
John H

GI Bill
 

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 12:04:24 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 11:53:00 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 11:35:48 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 10:36:15 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 10:05:10 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 09:54:04 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 09:37:28 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 09:30:31 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 08:57:22 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 08:20:13 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 12:52:34 -0000, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 00:44:51 +0000, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:


I agree with that. I mean, I don't begrudge the current veterans their
due - good for them.

Speaking of veterans, I heard something disturbing on the radio this
morning. It seems increasing numbers of current soldiers are losing in
child custody hearings. Some courts are deciding recurring tours out of
country don't provide a stable home environment. I can see putting a
child's welfare first, but, geez, what an added cost to those putting
their ass on the line.

Nothing new there. That's been going on since soldiers have been sent
overseas.

So much for your "Family Values".


Family values have nothing to do with it. I've been there and done that.
Continuously looking for a fight does you no good.


Family values is ALL the above has to do with. Continuously exposing
yourself as an amoral self absorbed pig does you no good.


"...amoral self absorbed pig..."

Wow, is that because I'm not into baby killing or because I couldn't take
my kids to Korea?


It's who you are on every level, apparently.


Why is it that a discussion with you folks ends with you making personal
attacks, name-calling, derogatory implications, etc.

I've never understood that. Doug, Harry, you - all the same.

There is no such thing as "you folks".

Why do YOU folks

Say what??

insist on equating abortion to murder, yet have no
problem supporting the death penalty. Don't try to weasel out of that
with some argument about people who get executed are different. In
fact, many of them are later found to be innocent, and you yourself
cited the Christian ultimatum, "Thou shalt Not Kill". Is that one of
the ten commandments, or the ten suggestions to be used when
convenient?


I'm astonished that you know my religious inclinations and my feelings on
the death penalty.

Again, why is it that a discussion with you folks ends with you making
personal attacks, name-calling, derogatory implications, etc?


I think you'll have to ask "you folks".


Let's start with you.

Why is it that a discussion with *you* ends with you making personal
attacks, name-calling, derogatory implications, etc?

--
John H

GI Bill
 

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 12:48:05 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 12:43:05 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 12:04:24 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 11:53:00 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 11:35:48 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 10:36:15 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 10:05:10 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 09:54:04 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 09:37:28 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 09:30:31 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 08:57:22 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 08:20:13 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 12:52:34 -0000, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 00:44:51 +0000, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:


I agree with that. I mean, I don't begrudge the current veterans their
due - good for them.

Speaking of veterans, I heard something disturbing on the radio this
morning. It seems increasing numbers of current soldiers are losing in
child custody hearings. Some courts are deciding recurring tours out of
country don't provide a stable home environment. I can see putting a
child's welfare first, but, geez, what an added cost to those putting
their ass on the line.

Nothing new there. That's been going on since soldiers have been sent
overseas.

So much for your "Family Values".


Family values have nothing to do with it. I've been there and done that.
Continuously looking for a fight does you no good.


Family values is ALL the above has to do with. Continuously exposing
yourself as an amoral self absorbed pig does you no good.


"...amoral self absorbed pig..."

Wow, is that because I'm not into baby killing or because I couldn't take
my kids to Korea?


It's who you are on every level, apparently.


Why is it that a discussion with you folks ends with you making personal
attacks, name-calling, derogatory implications, etc.

I've never understood that. Doug, Harry, you - all the same.

There is no such thing as "you folks".

Why do YOU folks

Say what??

insist on equating abortion to murder, yet have no
problem supporting the death penalty. Don't try to weasel out of that
with some argument about people who get executed are different. In
fact, many of them are later found to be innocent, and you yourself
cited the Christian ultimatum, "Thou shalt Not Kill". Is that one of
the ten commandments, or the ten suggestions to be used when
convenient?


I'm astonished that you know my religious inclinations and my feelings on
the death penalty.

Again, why is it that a discussion with you folks ends with you making
personal attacks, name-calling, derogatory implications, etc?


I think you'll have to ask "you folks".


Let's start with you.

Why is it that a discussion with *you* ends with you making personal
attacks, name-calling, derogatory implications, etc?

Probably has something to do with you.


Understandable.
--
John H